| 
  
  
     
     
     
   | 
      
        | 
            
            
            
            
                      
             |   
          
          
          
          Mamata Banerjee's and Jayalalitha's victories in the West Bengal and Tamil Nadu   assembly elections reflect two crucial aspects of Indian politics. One is that   Marxism has lost much of its lure and the other is that allegations of sleaze   can be hugely damaging to politicians. The second assertion can seem obvious   but, surprisingly enough, it does not seem to be appreciated by the political   class. |  
  
      
	  
	  
	  For instance, Rajiv Gandhi did not realize how the Bofors howitzer scam will   erode his popularity in 1989. Similarly, Tamil Nadu's outgoing ruling family led   by the octogenarian M. Karunandhi defended the scam-tainted former   communications minister Andimuthu Raja without realising that he was digging his   party, the DMK's political grave.
 But to start with West Bengal, having   built their bases in the heady days of the Vietnam war with anti-American   slogans, the ruling Communists were oblivious of the fact that, four decades   later, the old tirades against US "imperialism", as during the nuclear deal in   2008, were virtually meaningless to the present generation. The same is also   true of the routine Leftist castigation of market-oriented policies, which were   said to have been undertaken by the Manmohan Singh government at the prodding of   the World Bank and International Monetary Fund.
 
 The setback suffered by   the Left in West Bengal, evident in the loss of votes to the extent of nine   percent, was due to its conviction that as long as it propagated its supposedly   pro-poor ideology, its inadequacies in the matter of governance would not   matter. Moreover, not only was the Left unapologetic about ruining the state's   industrial potential through militant trade union tactics, there was no   moderation of the "arrogance" of the cadres, as the communists themselves   occasionally admitted.
 
 The absence of ideological appeal, compounded by   administrative deficiencies and lack of development, meant that the situation   was ripe for an aggressive opponent to sweep the Left out of power, as Mamata   Banerjee has done. But even she might have failed if the Marxists did not follow   two contradictory policies. One was to make up for the earlier hounding out of   industrialists by inviting the corporate sector to invest in the state. This   decision to sup with the so-called "class enemies" meant that the Left was   letting down its "ideological guard", as the Leftist economist, Prabhat Patnaik,   has said.
 
 But while compromising on the dogmatic front (which suggests   that even the Left is not unaware that their doctrines have lost their sheen),   the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government banked on the familiar "arrogance" of the   party's rank and file to browbeat farmers into giving up their lands. When the   cadres violently confronted the resisting farmers in Nandigram, Bhattacharjee   proudly said the latter, who had established a base there by driving out Marxist   supporters, have been paid back in their own coin.
 
 Although he later   apologised for his remark, the damage had been done. As his personal defeat in   his constituency, and of several other ministers, has shown, the voters'   rejection of the party has been total. While the Left's loss of Kerala is in   keeping with the tradition of victories and losses by the two rivals - the Left   Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) -   every five years, the setback in West Bengal means that the comrades will have   to reinvent themselves if they hope to return to power. Since Marxism is no   longer a paying proposition, the cadres and their mentors will at least have to   shed their Stalinist ways for any chance of success.
 
 But while the Left's   decline has been a continuing process since their reverses in the 2009   parliamentary polls, the success of Jayalalitha's AIADMK in Tamil Nadu means   that she has bounced back after five years in a Kerala-style alternating stints   in power by the DMK and the AIADMK. However, she might not have but for the   DMK's follies.
 
 It wasn't only the allegations of corruption which cast a   shadow on the DMK's and its partner, the Congress' prospects, the affairs of the   ruling family in which the aging patriarch was unable to control his two   power-hungry sons did not endear him to the voters. Given Karunanidhi's advanced   age and the antics of the two uncharismatic sons, the DMK's future looks bleak.   If it fades away, the much younger Jayalalitha - she is 63 - can look forward to   happy days if she does not allow her own imperious ways to alienate the   electorate.
 
 For the Congress, the setback in Tamil Nadu will be   compensated by the return to power in West Bengal, though as Mamata's junior   partner, and the successes in Kerala, Puduchery and Assam though it barely   scraped through in Kerala. Four out of five is not a bad score.
 
 All the   parties will have to take into account, yet again, the acute judgmental   qualities of the Indian voter. Although the unknown person, who presses the   button on the voting machine, has shown time and again that no one can fool him   - neither Indira Gandhi with her socialistic promises during the Emergency, nor   Lalu Prasad with his championing of the backward castes in 2005 - the   politicians do not seem to realize this. In the latest electoral exercise too,   the voter has displayed his maturity by evicting the palpably corrupt and the   pretentious ideologue.
 
 
      
     comments... |  
   |